All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: thunder.leizhen@huawei.com (Leizhen (ThunderTown))
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] arm64/dma-mapping: remove an unnecessary conversion
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 19:06:27 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56EA8FB3.2050505@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56E8BD51.6010008@huawei.com>



On 2016/3/16 9:56, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2016/3/15 23:37, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 10:12:11AM +0800, Zhen Lei wrote:
>>> 1. In swiotlb_alloc_coherent, the branch of __get_free_pages. Directly
>>>    return vaddr on success, and pass vaddr to free_pages on failure.
>>> 2. So, we can directly transparent pass vaddr from __dma_free to
>>>    swiotlb_free_coherent, keep consistent with swiotlb_alloc_coherent.
>>>
>>> This patch have no functional change,
>>
>> I don't think so.
>>
>>> but can obtain a bit performance improvement.
>>
>> Have you actually measured it?
> I have not run any performance testing, but reduced a line of code. So I said "a bit".
> 
>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c b/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
>>> index a6e757c..b2f2834 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
>>> @@ -187,8 +187,6 @@ static void __dma_free(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>>>  		       void *vaddr, dma_addr_t dma_handle,
>>>  		       struct dma_attrs *attrs)
>>>  {
>>> -	void *swiotlb_addr = phys_to_virt(dma_to_phys(dev, dma_handle));
>>> -
>>>  	size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);
>>>
>>>  	if (!is_device_dma_coherent(dev)) {
>>> @@ -196,7 +194,7 @@ static void __dma_free(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>>>  			return;
>>>  		vunmap(vaddr);
>>>  	}
>>> -	__dma_free_coherent(dev, size, swiotlb_addr, dma_handle, attrs);
>>> +	__dma_free_coherent(dev, size, vaddr, dma_handle, attrs);
>>>  }
>>
>> What happens when !is_device_dma_coherent(dev)? (hint: read two lines
>> above __dma_free_coherent).
Do you afraid "vaddr" maybe modified by these statement?
First, it could not be __free_from_pool. Otherwise, the function vunmap(which after it) can not work well.
Then, it count not be vunmap too, the parameter is defined as "const void *".

In the call chain: __dma_free_coherent-->__dma_free_coherent-->swiotlb_free_coherent, only swiotlb_free_coherent finally use "vaddr".

>>
> The whole function of __dma_free as below: (nobody use swiotlb_addr except __dma_free_coherent)
> static void __dma_free(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>                        void *vaddr, dma_addr_t dma_handle,
>                        struct dma_attrs *attrs)
> {
>         void *swiotlb_addr = phys_to_virt(dma_to_phys(dev, dma_handle));
> 
>         size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);
> 
>         if (!is_device_dma_coherent(dev)) {
>                 if (__free_from_pool(vaddr, size))
>                         return;
>                 vunmap(vaddr);
>         }
>         __dma_free_coherent(dev, size, swiotlb_addr, dma_handle, attrs);
> }
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Zefan Li <lizefan@huawei.com>, Xinwei Hu <huxinwei@huawei.com>,
	Tianhong Ding <dingtianhong@huawei.com>,
	Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] arm64/dma-mapping: remove an unnecessary conversion
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 19:06:27 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56EA8FB3.2050505@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56E8BD51.6010008@huawei.com>



On 2016/3/16 9:56, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2016/3/15 23:37, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 10:12:11AM +0800, Zhen Lei wrote:
>>> 1. In swiotlb_alloc_coherent, the branch of __get_free_pages. Directly
>>>    return vaddr on success, and pass vaddr to free_pages on failure.
>>> 2. So, we can directly transparent pass vaddr from __dma_free to
>>>    swiotlb_free_coherent, keep consistent with swiotlb_alloc_coherent.
>>>
>>> This patch have no functional change,
>>
>> I don't think so.
>>
>>> but can obtain a bit performance improvement.
>>
>> Have you actually measured it?
> I have not run any performance testing, but reduced a line of code. So I said "a bit".
> 
>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c b/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
>>> index a6e757c..b2f2834 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
>>> @@ -187,8 +187,6 @@ static void __dma_free(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>>>  		       void *vaddr, dma_addr_t dma_handle,
>>>  		       struct dma_attrs *attrs)
>>>  {
>>> -	void *swiotlb_addr = phys_to_virt(dma_to_phys(dev, dma_handle));
>>> -
>>>  	size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);
>>>
>>>  	if (!is_device_dma_coherent(dev)) {
>>> @@ -196,7 +194,7 @@ static void __dma_free(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>>>  			return;
>>>  		vunmap(vaddr);
>>>  	}
>>> -	__dma_free_coherent(dev, size, swiotlb_addr, dma_handle, attrs);
>>> +	__dma_free_coherent(dev, size, vaddr, dma_handle, attrs);
>>>  }
>>
>> What happens when !is_device_dma_coherent(dev)? (hint: read two lines
>> above __dma_free_coherent).
Do you afraid "vaddr" maybe modified by these statement?
First, it could not be __free_from_pool. Otherwise, the function vunmap(which after it) can not work well.
Then, it count not be vunmap too, the parameter is defined as "const void *".

In the call chain: __dma_free_coherent-->__dma_free_coherent-->swiotlb_free_coherent, only swiotlb_free_coherent finally use "vaddr".

>>
> The whole function of __dma_free as below: (nobody use swiotlb_addr except __dma_free_coherent)
> static void __dma_free(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>                        void *vaddr, dma_addr_t dma_handle,
>                        struct dma_attrs *attrs)
> {
>         void *swiotlb_addr = phys_to_virt(dma_to_phys(dev, dma_handle));
> 
>         size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);
> 
>         if (!is_device_dma_coherent(dev)) {
>                 if (__free_from_pool(vaddr, size))
>                         return;
>                 vunmap(vaddr);
>         }
>         __dma_free_coherent(dev, size, swiotlb_addr, dma_handle, attrs);
> }
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2016-03-17 11:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-03-15  2:12 [PATCH 1/1] arm64/dma-mapping: remove an unnecessary conversion Zhen Lei
2016-03-15 15:37 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-03-16  1:56   ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
2016-03-16  1:56     ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
2016-03-17 11:06     ` Leizhen (ThunderTown) [this message]
2016-03-17 11:06       ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
2016-03-17 11:59       ` Catalin Marinas
2016-03-17 11:59         ` Catalin Marinas
2016-03-18  1:17         ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
2016-03-18  1:17           ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=56EA8FB3.2050505@huawei.com \
    --to=thunder.leizhen@huawei.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.